The Immortal Mind

[dedalos]

 

[Penguin]

Ok, now I see what you mean by saying that I was unoriginal.  I didn't think of my own premise, but Descartes' fit the bill so well that I didn't think anything of copying him.  I didn't mean telepathy (though it would be awesome if I could do that), I meant empathy; to understand how other people feel based on verbal and non-verbal cues and reacting to it in an intelligent manner.

I understand what you mean by not placing myself as the center of the universe, to try to view it from different vantage points.  If I place myself at the center, then I will contribute my own bias to what I see instead of seeing things for what they are. 

I think that the floating mind ties into that as well, having no barriers can help you.

-Penguin

[dedalos]

I understand what you mean by not placing myself as the center of the universe, to try to view it from different vantage points.  If I place myself at the center, then I will contribute my own bias to what I see instead of seeing things for what they are. 

-Penguin

Ahhhh, good.  maybe now you will stop PMing me 

[FireDrgn]

Ok my turn to break the rules.  I am interested in looking at it from a logical perspective.   "To float ones mind anything has to be possible. There is nothing that cannot be.  Maybe I just don't understand and this should be contained to the context.

I can point out some things that are impossible.  Including your statement that i agree with . about acquireing Infinate wisdom is impossible. Only things that are true are possible. X can not be X and not X at the same time in the same place. You cannot imagine on "any world" a triangle with 5 sides.

Even if Penguins post was not all original, It has great thinking potential especially since he was willing to post it in an open forum.

<Salute>

[dedalos]

. . . .  since he was willing to post it in an open forum.

<Salute>

You know, like the guy in the movies that charges a machine gun nest.  Is he a hero or does he just not know any better? 

[mechanic]

Ok my turn to break the rules.  I am interested in looking at it from a logical perspective.   "To float ones mind anything has to be possible. There is nothing that cannot be.  Maybe I just don't understand and this should be contained to the context.

I can point out some things that are impossible.  Including your statement that i agree with . about acquireing Infinate wisdom is impossible. Only things that are true are possible. X can not be X and not X at the same time in the same place. You cannot imagine on "any world" a triangle with 5 sides.

Logic is a curse when applied to anything but logical subjects. Arithmatic is logical and thus requires logical thinking.Although, even in something like physics the 'impossible' becomes possible all the time. There are some people that believe space is comprised of 11 dimensions. How possible is that to the logic of yesterday. But that is a digression from my answer. My simple answer to you is that not everything in life or in the mind is logical and therefore logic is not always required.

[FireDrgn]

Logic is a curse when applied to anything but logical subjects. Arithmatic is logical and thus requires logical thinking.Although, even in something like physics the 'impossible' becomes possible all the time. There are some people that believe space is comprised of 11 dimensions. How possible is that to the logic of yesterday. But that is a digression from my answer. My simple answer to you is that not everything in life or in the mind is logical and therefore logic is not always required.

Not everything is logical, but you must use logic to know that.  So something is wrong with your claim.    logical  is the opposite of not logical.  Are you claiming true and false.   You are equivicating between logic and logical.

Everything is either true , false or unknown.  To reason one must use logic. 

[FireDrgn]

You know, like the guy in the movies that charges a machine gun nest.  Is he a hero or does he just not know any better? 

ad-Hominem 

[F22RaptorDude]

I'm just going to say, I read everything and I still don't get whats going on. Maybe its good to be as dumb as me.  Then you wouldn't have to use such big words all the time. 

[bcadoo]

Ok, now I see what you mean by saying that I was unoriginal.  I didn't think of my own premise, but Descartes' fit the bill so well that I didn't think anything of copying him.  I didn't mean telepathy (though it would be awesome if I could do that), I meant empathy; to understand how other people feel based on verbal and non-verbal cues and reacting to it in an intelligent manner.

I understand what you mean by not placing myself as the center of the universe, to try to view it from different vantage points.  If I place myself at the center, then I will contribute my own bias to what I see instead of seeing things for what they are. 

I think that the floating mind ties into that as well, having no barriers can help you.

-Penguin

Your logic is flawed.

Thought is not required for something to exist.  Many a sentient being has been taken out by a 'thoughtless' pathogen.

[mechanic]

Not everything is logical, but you must use logic to know that.  So something is wrong with your claim.    logical  is the opposite of not logical.  Are you claiming true and false.   You are equivicating between logic and logical.

Everything is either true , false or unknown.  To reason one must use logic.  

What came first? The chicken or the egg?
There must have been a time before logic was even considered. It is only our evolved minds that refer all of existence to being true, false or unknown. We decide what is true and what is false and we often change our minds on that, but in it's purst essence, the whole of existence is illogical and unknown. We require logic to make sense of that. Existence does not require logic.

[Penguin]

First, logic existed before we did.  Whether we are around or not, e=mc².  The universe existed before we did, and we did not change it by beginning to think.

The egg came first, evoluntionarily speaking.  The kingdom Avia predates the chicken.  If you refer to a paradox, then it can be solved by 'thinking outside the box'.

Existence does not require thought, however, logic is everywhere.  Causes come before effects, and math is always true. 

If you refer to consciousness, then yes, that does require thought and life.  Do not confuse logic with being conscious.

-Penguin 

[mechanic]

 You assume those things because you cannot imagine an existence where math and logic do not exist. That is why you fail at philosophy so far.

[FireDrgn]

" My simple answer to you is that not everything in life or in the mind is logical and therefore logic is not always required.

 What do mean not logical?  Please give me an example of what not logical is.    

Your using a negative which deletes information. I am going to do my best to recover the deleted information from you.    


Logic existed at the same time everything else did.       Logic is only a representation of what is. We either are capable of representing what is or we are not . logic does not change what is.

maybe i should go a step further.   logic  is a true representation of what is    logical error is the misrepresentation of what is.

Thought does not change what is .thought is only a reprisintation of what is.  Logic  existed before thought did.

[mechanic]

That is a fundemental aspect of philosophy as far as I believe, leaving the possibility that 2+2=5 open.

Example of not logical is just that. The statement '2+2=5' is not logical. Obviously that is only a representation of what could be if we think outside of logic. I am not arguing that specific equation.
We cannot easily imagine an existence where logic does not apply, so we assume that logic always was.

Lifr on the most basic form shows how logic is not always true. Single cell division gives us the equation 1+0=2. You might argue that it gives 1/2=0.5, but it does not. Each cell is complete and whole after division. Life is not logical.